Talk:Symphony/Draft: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
No edit summary
imported>Martin Baldwin-Edwards
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:


Looks like an excellent start! --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 22:11, 18 October 2007 (CDT)
Looks like an excellent start! --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 22:11, 18 October 2007 (CDT)
:Yes, a brave start! One point, which is an issue as it involves a category heading, is that Beethoven symphonies are not normally seen as Romantic: they form a transition between classical and Romantic, and in a sense belong in a category of their own. You have more or less done that, by separating him from the 19th century symphonists, but still -- he was also 19th C :-)) --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 22:43, 18 October 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 22:43, 18 October 2007

This article has a Citable Version.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A large-scale musical composition, generally regarded as the central orchestral form. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Music [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English


Well, this is the first try. It wouldn't surprise me if this isn't taken down. Tee hee. Hopefully a music scholar can come onboard and pump up the volume, as it were. Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:12, 17 October 2007 (CDT)

Looks like an excellent start! --Larry Sanger 22:11, 18 October 2007 (CDT)

Yes, a brave start! One point, which is an issue as it involves a category heading, is that Beethoven symphonies are not normally seen as Romantic: they form a transition between classical and Romantic, and in a sense belong in a category of their own. You have more or less done that, by separating him from the 19th century symphonists, but still -- he was also 19th C :-)) --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 22:43, 18 October 2007 (CDT)